Wendell Anderson — who died on Sunday at 83 — will be remembered for many things, but most prominently for the "Minnesota Miracle" enacted in 1971 during his first term as governor.
The term was coined by the U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations in the title of its report, which stated: "Minnesota lawmakers and governor may well claim the outstanding fiscal performance award of 1971 for their effort to provide a rational state-local fiscal system. By assuming a dominant role in state-local fiscal policymaking, they intended to reduce the fiscal disparities among school districts, strengthen the general fiscal position of cities and counties and ease the burden of property taxes on homeowners and business firms. In the process, they made Minnesota a model for other states to follow."
High praise, indeed! And well-deserved.
Minnesota's state and local financing system had been spiraling out of control in the 1960s, with rapidly rising property taxes, increased disparities in local educational funding and chaotic fiscal policy. In 1967, the Republican-controlled Legislature (to be exact, it was controlled by the conservative caucus, this being the era before formal partisan identification of legislators) and Republican Gov. Harold LeVander partly reformed the system by the passage of a sales tax and enactment of a state-paid homestead credit for homeowners. But serious design flaws in the 1967 reforms resulted in only temporary relief, and by 1971 the system was again in crisis.
But in 1971, the Legislature and Gov. Anderson instituted a massive and much more lasting reform. In that single year, Minnesota increased the state's share of local public school operating funds from 43 percent to 65 percent; reformed the distribution of school aid to assure much greater equality of funding between richer and poorer school districts; increased and reformed state aid to cities and counties; provided for sharing of 40 percent of future commercial-industrial property tax base across all units of the Twin Cities; partly reformed the system of property tax classification, including removing the obsolete inclusion of business inventories and equipment in the property tax; upgraded the professionalism of property assessors; upgraded the local government fiscal information system, and removed the potential for a Balkanized sales and income tax system by prohibiting counties and cities from levying such taxes without legislative permission.
Was it a miracle?
I was Anderson's tax and school aid adviser and was involved in every stage — from designing the governor's initial plan, testifying to legislative committees, dealing with individual legislators and the press, and taking part in the final negotiations. From my point of view, it certainly looked like a miracle. Keep in mind that while Anderson, a DFLer, had been elected governor by a respectable margin in 1970, both houses of the Legislature remained under Republican control. Republicans had controlled the Legislature for decades during an era of relatively weak governors (Republican and DFL), were accustomed to legislative control of fiscal policy and were not at all inclined to cede policy control to a newly elected young governor (Anderson was 37).
The resulting clash between Anderson's ambitious tax and school finance reform plan and a hostile legislative majority was monumental. Minority DFL legislators, led by Nicholas Coleman in the Senate and Martin Sabo in the House, were largely united behind Anderson's plan. Majority Republicans largely rejected it but were internally divided about how to respond. Senate Republicans led by Stanley Holmquist agreed that a major reform of some sort was needed and passed a reform plan that included a value-added tax and a radical reform of how state revenue was raised, coupled with more modest reforms of school and local government aids. House Republicans, led by Speaker Aubrey Dirlam and Majority Leader Ernest Lindstrom, were inclined to minimal change, rejected both Anderson's and the Senate Republicans' reform plan and passed a modest revision of the status quo. That, in turn, was rejected by the Senate. The regular legislative session ended without passage of any tax and school finance package.